gmane.culture.people.rohit-khare

Re: divegeek/uscode · GitHub

Jeff Bone — 2012-05-25T21:05:21

Apologies for the naked link.  Comments:  English is a shitty programming language, USC is a bug-ridden behemoth legacy system, and much of the action happens elsewhere anyway (e.g., regulatory apparatus etc.)

That said this is a powerful idea.

Taken one step further - laws to be encoded in executable descriptions (say, arbitrarily, cf financial instruments / contracts, Python) and you'd have real transformative change.  Profiling, bug elimination, absurd complexity reduction through refactoring, open source the whole project w legislators and their dev staffs responsible for pulling changes into trunk based on voting, etc.

What are the (fucking!) domain objects, Kenneth?

Pipe dream, sure.  Model for replacement when the system finally breaks completely...

jb


On May 25, 2012, at 15:56, Jeff Bone <jbone< at >place.org> wrote:


_______________________________________________
FoRK mailing list
http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork

divegeek/uscode · GitHub

Jeff Bone — 2012-05-25T20:56:51

https://github.com/divegeek/uscode



_______________________________________________
FoRK mailing list
http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork

Re: Facebook

Lucas Gonze — 2012-05-23T18:34:30

Well then, I'm glad to find there's still a corner of my shriveled up
cynical heart that contains naivete. Thank you for that.

On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 11:05 AM, Ken Ganshirt < at > Yahoo
<ken_ganshirt< at >yahoo.ca> wrote:

_______________________________________________
FoRK mailing list
http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork

Re: Facebook

Reese — 2012-05-23T18:12:24


Why, because FB didn't communicate with all of the underwriters, even
the ones they had no business arrangements with? Why do you not see
the underwriters only communicating the update to certain investment
firms as a larger problem? Are you missing something here or am I?

I'm inclined to agree with Gary: it's THEIR game and THEY let US play.

Reese




_______________________________________________
FoRK mailing list
http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork

Re: Facebook

2012-05-23T18:05:48

Nope.  It was the underwriters.  The selective disclosure to institutional clients has long been common practice.  Not for just IPOs but for anything the analysts discover.

The only thing different about this is that FB was honest and disclosed a potentially negative upcoming quarter during the IPO roadshow.  Most companies won't do that during the buildup to an IPO.

So you could argue that FB was unusually forthright and the underwriters did their usual job of informing their favorites.  Whether FB suggested an opening price that might have been a bit high is irrelevant.  The underwriters were free to ignore it.

Unfortunately, nobody appears to have done anything illegal.  Nor even unusual (except, perhaps, FB disclosing something potentially negative at a bad time).  Insider information seems to be okay if it goes through a third party (e.g. underwriters/analysts).

       ...ken...


--- On Wed, 5/23/12, Lucas Gonze <lucas.gonze< at >gmail.com> wrote:


_______________________________________________
FoRK m

Re: Facebook

Lucas Gonze — 2012-05-23T17:37:54

It was FB who communicated selectively, I think.

On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 10:08 AM, Reese <howell.r< at >inkworkswell.com> wrote:

_______________________________________________
FoRK mailing list
http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork

Re: Facebook

Gary Stock — 2012-05-23T17:29:57

I agree they created their own problem out of raw hubris.

I submit that they also created something that may move us toward a 
solution:  substantial, undeniable proof -- visible even to the least 
connected American -- that for the most wealthy people in the world, 
Wall Street IS A FIXED GAME.

GS


On 5/23/12 12:57 PM, Lucas Gonze wrote:
_______________________________________________
FoRK mailing list
http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork

Re: Facebook

Reese — 2012-05-23T17:08:22



FB did? Or the underwriters did?





_______________________________________________
FoRK mailing list
http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork

Re: Facebook

Lucas Gonze — 2012-05-23T16:57:39

Said kosher bacon 'n' shrimp double cheeseburger is a fine meal
indeed, but I can't imagine the hasidim eating one on Saturday.
Facebook just created a non-trivial problem out of nowhere.

On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 9:53 AM, Aaron Burt <aaron< at >bavariati.org> wrote:

_______________________________________________
FoRK mailing list
http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork

Re: Facebook

Aaron Burt — 2012-05-23T16:53:31

FB disclosed info to its underwriters, which seems appropriate.
The underwriters selectively disclosed to potential investors, which is
kosher as a bacon 'n' shrimp double cheeseburger.

The underwriters (Vampire Squid and co.) have been untouchable so far.
It will be interesting to see how this very public IPO plays out.

It will, of course, be (both simultaneously and individually) Obama's,
Romney's and Boehner's fault, and also that Glass Seagull guy.

Not much different from any other horserace,
  Aaron
_______________________________________________
FoRK mailing list
http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork

Re: The open cloud...

Stephen Williams — 2012-05-23T03:26:50

Or just between my own locations.  I have at least 4 locations where I can locate data, several of which have stability on the 
order of 10s of years so far.

Cheap, quality colocation is available here and there.  I pay $90/mo. to host my own box (quad core, many TB of drive space) 
with 10Mb bidirectional unlimited Internet connectivity, in a secure facility with 24 hour support and an on-demand remote KVM.  
Backing it up is easy, restoring to it basically requires a good uplink (which I do not have at home currently) or sending a 
hard drive or visiting the Dojo for a couple hours or similar.  As long as I keep it replicated, it is essentially my own 
private unlimited cloud server.


sdw

_______________________________________________
FoRK mailing list
http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork

Re: Facebook

Tom Higgins — 2012-05-23T01:26:08

Another take on the story...
http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2012/05/how-facebook-fucked-up-its-own-ipo/
"So even the choice of exchange worked to screw this up yet further.
While the NYSE still engages in the same sort of HFT shenanigans
Nasdaq does, the specialist could have controlled the high frequency
firehose, electing to turn it off (or just ignore it) in order to make
an orderly IPO market."

-tom(so glad my money is tied up in other transactions)higgins
_______________________________________________
FoRK mailing list
http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork

Re: Facebook

Joseph S. Barrera III — 2012-05-22T23:52:49

The moral appears to be: read the prospectus... and do diffs against 
previous versions :-)

- Joe


_______________________________________________
FoRK mailing list
http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork

Re: Facebook

Lucas Gonze — 2012-05-22T23:46:46

Correct.

On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 4:37 PM, Owen Byrne <owen< at >permafrost.net> wrote:
_______________________________________________
FoRK mailing list
http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork

Re: Facebook

Owen Byrne — 2012-05-22T23:37:25

On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 04:35:06PM -0700, Joseph S. Barrera III wrote:
Guessing this (at the top of techmeme):
http://www.businessinsider.com/exclusive-heres-the-inside-story-of-what-happened-on-the-facebook-ipo-2012-5

Owen
_______________________________________________
FoRK mailing list
http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork

Re: Facebook

Joseph S. Barrera III — 2012-05-22T23:35:06

What story? Can you provide a link or two?

- Joe
_______________________________________________
FoRK mailing list
http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork

Facebook

Lucas Gonze — 2012-05-22T23:30:26

Blodgett's story is serious business. I've never seen something like
it before outside of the banking scandals of the last few years. But a
dot-com is not going to be protected from itself like the big banks
are.

Or am I overreacting? How big a hit will FB take?
_______________________________________________
FoRK mailing list
http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork

Re: The open cloud...

Gregory Alan Bolcer — 2012-05-22T20:01:49

Freenet lives!  Uprizer 3.0!

On 5/22/2012 12:54 PM, Eugen Leitl wrote:

Re: The open cloud...

Eugen Leitl — 2012-05-22T19:54:05

https://plus.google.com/113240094580623261022/posts
_______________________________________________
FoRK mailing list
http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork

Re: The open cloud...

Eugen Leitl — 2012-05-22T19:48:32


Not really, given that you can outsorce the handling of raw hardware
to shops which are a) very cheap and good at it b) unlike the Big players
are actually responsive, should you're no longer be operating nominally (uh-oh)

Running OpenQRM or OpenStack on top of that actually buys you quite a lot.
You can run the same stack locally or on your local hardware provider.
If you add some borg puppetry skills you can even go scale places (if
your hardware monger is responsive you can scale up overnight).


If given the choice of rolling your own, or living HeadInTheClouds(tm), and $deity have
mercy is something GoesWrong(tm) I can see how there's plenty of small to medium-scale
operators which are personally accountable. The people who you know and have personal
relationships with (if all fails, you know where their family parks and their car lives).
_______________________________________________
FoRK mailing list
http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork

Re: The open cloud...

Eugen Leitl — 2012-05-22T19:28:31


Software alone is useless -- unless you're a geek who rolls your own. 
And actually cares about brainwrestle sprocketry, close and personal.

Anyone else who's encountering some pesky operational problems is just 
looking for some low-hanging gonads to squeeze, and extract your data. 
_______________________________________________
FoRK mailing list
http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork